The 1st pick in the draft is ONE pick better than the SB winner.

[mgteich]

The 1st round pick ABSOLUTELY will be franchise altering....the question is whether for better or worse?

As for the rest of the draft relative to the Eagles (assuming they win the SB and are the #32 pick)...yeah I want to do better than them, no doubt about it. But remember the years where the Pats were always picking #25-#32....we always felt that there were maybe 15-20 guys with 1st round grades...and everyone from #15/#20 through #65 had pretty much the same level of talent...more or less. We were very happy when Wilfork dropped....we grabbed an injured Gronk...we tried with Easley...etc...all because the alternative was to stand pat and take a healthy 2nd round talent.

So, in other words...the Eagles would be at a disadvantage even if we disregard our 1st round pick because by the time the 2nd round rolls around...we will be picking the best player available whereas the Eagles will probably be picking for need (as it would be their first choice) with all else being equal.

OK, so you believe that our pick at #6 would definitely be franchise altering. Let us agree to disagree.
================
And yes, there are blue chip players, sometimes though pick 10, sometimes through pick 15 or even 30. The, as you say, they are lose though 50, or even through the second round.

As of now, I would think that there is a talent break after the top 6.

 

[Hyped]

OK, so you believe that our pick at #6 would definitely be franchise altering. Let us agree to disagree.
================
And yes, there are blue chip players, sometimes though pick 10, sometimes through pick 15 or even 30. The, as you say, they are lose though 50, or even through the second round.

As of now, I would think that there is a talent break after the top 6.

Richard Seymour disagrees with this post

 

[0818NePa]

OK, I'll try to be more clear.

My position is that after we make our first pick, the patriots will NOT have advantages throughout the draft. In every future There is nothing pick, the patriots will pick after the SB champ.

The patriots will have one very, very, very valuable pick that will obviously make our resources greater than the SB champ. HOWEVER, after we pick our OT, the next pick by the SB champ is 32, and ours is likely to be 37. After that the SB champ picks at 64, we pick at 69 and so on.
=========================
As we go into the draft, presuming a #5 pick, we have a top OT and the rest of the draft. The SB champ has the rest of the draft. Will the OT move us significantly closer to the SB champ in quality. Perhaps, if the SB didn't have as many draft resources as we will have after we draft our OT. We aren't one player away from the path to getting deep into the playoffs unless that one player is a Stroud equivalent.

OK, I'll try to be more clear.

My position is that after we make our first pick, the patriots will NOT have advantages throughout the draft. In every future pick, the patriots will pick after the SB champ.

The patriots will have one very, very, very valuable pick that will obviously make our resources greater than the SB champ. HOWEVER, after we pick our OT, the next pick by the SB champ is 32, and ours is likely to be 37. After that the SB champ picks at 64, we pick at 69 and so on.
=========================
As we go into the draft, presuming a #5 pick, we have a top OT and the rest of the draft. The SB champ has the rest of the draft. Will the OT move us significantly closer to the SB champ in quality. Perhaps, if the SB didn't have as many draft resources as we will have after we draft our OT. We aren't one player away from the path to getting deep into the playoffs unless that one player is a Stroud equivalent.

There is nothing to clarify. And it is not 'a position". It"s nonsense.

 

[lancerman]

So one weapon… that’s enough?

Sounds legit.

The Raiders got Devante Adams, Waller, Renfrow, Josh Jacob’s and got worse. But weapons… that’s the cure.

Are you ****ing pretending a guy who is on the shortlist for top 3 TE of all time, is an easy HOF'er, and is arguably the best pass catcher in the league is irrelevant? Yeah Kelce like Gronk makes every single other player on his offense better just by being there and being a threat that you can't scheme out of the game but still have to spend resources to try so he doesn't totally burn you anyways.

The Raiders didn't get worse this year lol... There's 5 games left in the season and they are only 1 game behind where they were last year. They are more likely to surpass last years record than stay below it. Adams is still slated to be a 1000 yard receiver this year. Renfrow is statistically going to wind up pretty much exactly the same as last year. Meyers is on pace to be more or less the same as last year. So most of the players are playing at roughly their usual skill level and the team is on pace to be as good or better than last year.

More confirmation that you literally don't know a goddamn thing about this league. Like do you seriously just make up some dumb narrative in your head and assume it's reality?

 

[lancerman]

So, you think that our #1 pick will be franchise altering. Wow! How many such players do you think are available?

No one is disregarding our #1 pick.

I'll be plainer. I expect/hope that our draft will be one player better than PHI, our #1 pick. Hopefully, our management will be equal to OHI on the rest of the picks.

You can't guarantee a hit anywhere. But it gives us our highest chance at drafting a quality player who is pro bowl caliber at a minimum. Considering that player is most likely to be a QB or WR.... yes it would dramatically alter the current state of the franchise. You are likely to either get the best player we've had at the most important position post Brady or the best WR since 2019 on a team that's been starved of WR talent. In dramatically changes an offense that has been inept for 5 years in the spots where it most needs it.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

The topic is like saying that the chiefs are only one player better than the patriots (Patrick Mahomes)

That's if you get a Patrick Mahomes, if you don't it's trouble

 

[lancerman]

Travis Kelce Gronk and Edelman are castoffs… ok.

How did Alex Smith do against us with Hunt Hill Charles and Kelce. Must have been all the QB that blew us right out of our home opener.

Wozzy is so desperate that he can't help but make contradictory statements in each post because he can't juggle his homer narrative correctly anymore.

He needs to despertaely convince everyone that the Belichick system is the reason for all the success so that he can fantasize that they will return to greatness without a massive overall. So he simultaneously needs to downplay Brady and act like he was just another role player and was not crucial while also convincing everyone that Belichick didn't fail this team and that it's a QB away and that Mac Jones and all the other QB's are just outliers that are so bad that they drag Belichick's otherwise good (it's really a piece of ****) team down with them.

It's the same reason he needs to pretend that Kelce and Gronk aren't worldclass level talents that are the true number 1's on their teams and dramatically alter the pass catching core. Or that Edelman is just some dude.

He's flailing because the alternative is to accept that Bill Belichick straight up has spent 5 years building a bad team that can't compete, needs an overhaul and that this team probably needs a longterm recalibration and rebuild that doesn't include Bill to rise back to contender level. Aka, the Belichick system is over and ran it's course and it won't succeed in the new NFL

 

[lancerman]

That's if you get a Patrick Mahomes, if you don't it's trouble

The problem is that it's not a true statement. Mahomes is a better QB than anyone on the Patriots..... Kelce is lightyears ahead of every pass catcher on the Patriots and changes every single teams defensive coverage, the Chiefs are a top 5 defense, the Patriots are closer to middle of the pack, the Chiefs have a top 10 offensive line, the Patriots have routinely been around the bottom. The Patriots have one of the less productive rushing corps in the NFL, the Chiefs are middle of the pack. The Patriots special teams is at the bottom of the league, the Chiefs are above average.

It's not one player.

 

[mgteich]

There is nothing to clarify. And it is not 'a position". It"s nonsense.

I guess I should bow to your expertise. I've only been following the NF; since well before the merger.

 

[lancerman]

I guess I should bow to your expertise. I've only been following the NF; since well before the merger.

The problem is your position relies on ignoring the absolute most valuable pick in the draft and then pretending like we are actually at a disadvantage picking after the Super Bowl champ the rest of the way.

Except in reality you get the most important pick in the entire draft that is statistically extremely likely to produce a Pro Bowl quality player at a high impact position and then your second pick is almost identical in value to the first pick the Super Bowl champions make. You are at an advantage the entire draft because your second and third and fourth picks are theoretically ahead of everyone else before you account for trades. If every pick hypothetically yielded a descending level of quality per draft spot, you get the best player in the draft and then your second pick is still basically on par with level of caliber all the top teams in the NFL are taking for thier first player.

You can't just ignore that you are always at a one player advantage and have the biggest pick on top of that throughout the draft to make your point.

The Patriots have had the last pick in the first round and traded it because they thought one proven WR was better than a near second round quality player. NOBODY would do that if they had the first overall pick in the draft.

 

[Wozzy]

Are you ****ing pretending a guy who is on the shortlist for top 3 TE of all time, is an easy HOF'er, and is arguably the best pass catcher in the league is irrelevant? Yeah Kelce like Gronk makes every single other player on his offense better just by being there and being a threat that you can't scheme out of the game but still have to spend resources to try so he doesn't totally burn you anyways.

What a *. Sure Kelce is great, a great athlete with the best offensive mind in football, and likely since Bill Walsh... oh yeah, with 150 targets every season regardless of who is throwing to him... and that happens to be Mahomes now and he's pretty good. There are a bunch of TE's in the NFL as athletically gifted as Kelce, some who are substantially more gifted, they just aren't in his position.

Show me the Chief's superstar WR from last season when they won a ring... oh yeah, it was Juju Smith Schuster... they guy you all say sucks now. Laughable.

The Raiders didn't get worse this year lol... There's 5 games left in the season and they are only 1 game behind where they were last year. They are more likely to surpass last years record than stay below it. Adams is still slated to be a 1000 yard receiver this year. Renfrow is statistically going to wind up pretty much exactly the same as last year. Meyers is on pace to be more or less the same as last year. So most of the players are playing at roughly their usual skill level and the team is on pace to be as good or better than last year.

The Raider's suck balls and fired their coach... again laughable.

More confirmation that you literally don't know a goddamn thing about this league. Like do you seriously just make up some dumb narrative in your head and assume it's reality?

burp

 

[Wozzy]

One would think you'd know more about that postseason given that that was the year you started following the Patriots...

Game 1: Brady threw for 312 yards and ran for a TD in an absolute blizzard. One of the greatest postseason performances of all time when you factor in the weather conditions.
Game 2: The guy got injured. I mean, it sucks but it happens...
Game 3: Despite being seriously injured, he threw for a TD and, oh by the way, led the team on one of the greatest game winning drives in the history of the NFL.

The NE Patriots did a complete 180 the day Tom Brady took over as starting QB. That is a fact and is completely undeniable.

He threw one TD and one interception in the entire 2001 postseason. That's what we refer to as a statistical fact.

Him playing efficient in tough conditions helped us win, helped immensely... but a lot else went right that postseason. The defense and special teams were exceptional. The notion that one player is responsible for everything is horsesht.

Seymour, Vinatieri, Brown, Brady... take one name out of that hat and they probably lose in 2001.

 

[Wozzy]

Never said that. Only correcting your wrong Vinatieri comment. Nice pivot though.

2001 he had 2 TDs, also who drove the team into all those field goals? Even the 1 Bledsoe TD was started halfway as Brady had them in midfield before his injury.

One passing TD, one rushing TD and one interception.... he was not the dominating force that Brady-stans want to pretend he was. He was buoyed by great defense, great scheme, a constant rushing attack and stellar special teams.

Again... the notion that one player does it alone is dumb. No matter how many times you guys wax poetic about the past and have fangasms.

The QB is the most important player, but you can win with just "average" or "good" if the team is good enough.

Nobody can win with "bad," and Mac was bad.

We'll find out if Zappe can be good or even great... anyone who says they know are guessing.

 

[ahmed]

One passing TD, one rushing TD and one interception.... he was not the dominating force that Brady-stans want to pretend he was. He was buoyed by great defense, great scheme, a constant rushing attack and stellar special teams.

Again... the notion that one player does it alone is dumb. No matter how many times you guys wax poetic about the past and have fangasms.

The QB is the most important player, but you can win with just "average" or "good" if the team is good enough.

Nobody can win with "bad," and Mac was bad.

We'll find out if Zappe can be good or even great... anyone who says they know are guessing.

Again I was only addressing your onerous take that Brady owes Vinatieri 2 rings which is 1) ridiculous and 2) he was objectively horrible in the Carolina SB. But since you keep pushing this dillusional narrative, let's address it.

Oakland game: 32/52 for 312 yards is great. In a blizzard. Not average or even good. Btw - look up winning % with 50 passes for QBs not named Brady . This great rushing attack had 65 yards from Smith and -12 by Brown/Desmond. So net 53.

Steelers game. Brady only had 115 yards in 1.5 quarters (on fewer throws) which is more than Bledsoe had the rest of the game. Great rushing attack with 60 yards.

SB: 145 passing. This was the only game where the rushing attack was actually good with 115 or so yards. The game plan was clearly conservative too. This is the game where he had a game winning drive with less than 2 minutes that average/good QBs make all the time right? When Madden said they should kneel on it.

This narrative that Brady was a passenger was purely because a 6th rounder is not supposed to be good. So to rationalize it people assigned credit to everyone and everything else. This is also why BB got lionized much more so than other great coaches with great QBs that were high picks.

This team went from 5-15 to a SB winner when he started playing but yeah it had nothing to do with him. It was pure coincidence. He did not always have great stats (hard when you have below average rushing, so so weapons and first year playing) but he always kept mistakes to a minimum, kept improving and came up big in the big moments. Everyone talks about how Tuck rule was why we beat the Raiders but everyone loves to brush off that Brady lead a tying drive and then a winning drive after that call. Something that Gannon failed to do when he was supposedly a much better QB.

As to rushing that gets so much credit, the only time he had a great rushing attack was 2004. That's it. The D was great no doubting that and I never said anything different.

Not going to break down 2003 and 2004 but let's just summarize and say he was much better than 2001.

 

[Wozzy]

Again I was only addressing your onerous take that Brady owes Vinatieri 2 rings which is 1) ridiculous and 2) he was objectively horrible in the Carolina SB. But since you keep pushing this dillusional narrative, let's address it.

Oakland game: 32/52 for 312 yards is great. In a blizzard. Not average or even good. Btw - look up winning % with 50 passes for QBs not named Brady . This great rushing attack had 65 yards from Smith and -12 by Brown/Desmond. So net 53.

Steelers game. Brady only had 115 yards in 1.5 quarters (on fewer throws) which is more than Bledsoe had the rest of the game. Great rushing attack with 60 yards.

SB: 145 passing. This was the only game where the rushing attack was actually good with 115 or so yards. The game plan was clearly conservative too. This is the game where he had a game winning drive with less than 2 minutes that average/good QBs make all the time right? When Madden said they should kneel on it.

This narrative that Brady was a passenger was purely because a 6th rounder is not supposed to be good. So to rationalize it people assigned credit to everyone and everything else. This is also why BB got lionized much more so than other great coaches with great QBs that were high picks.

This team went from 5-15 to a SB winner when he started playing but yeah it had nothing to do with him. It was pure coincidence. He did not always have great stats (hard when you have below average rushing, so so weapons and first year playing) but he always kept mistakes to a minimum, kept improving and came up big in the big moments. Everyone talks about how Tuck rule was why we beat the Raiders but everyone loves to brush off that Brady lead a tying drive and then a winning drive after that call. Something that Gannon failed to do when he was supposedly a much better QB.

As to rushing that gets so much credit, the only time he had a great rushing attack was 2004. That's it. The D was great no doubting that and I never said anything different.

Not going to break down 2003 and 2004 but let's just summarize and say he was much better than 2001.

I didn’t say Brady owes Adam for two rings, I said if not for one of the most clutch kickers in history Brady would probably have two fewer rings. That goes both ways.

I could have used Seymour, if BB doesn’t draft Richard they definitely don’t win in 2001 and probably miss out on another one in 2003.

The notion that one man does it alone in a sport with 53 man rosters is dumb, and that will never change. It’s a fanboy pipe dream.

 

[stcjones]

While I agree in premise, Brock Purdy is a great example of missing on a guy but getting it right eventually.

The 49ers didn’t just miss, they traded the house to get up in the top three and missed. Look at them now.

Would Brock Purdy take this years team to the playoffs or SB?! Purdy succeeds because of SF loaded team right now….put him here and what happens?! Purdy is like Tua …they are successful because of the OL and weapons around them imho

 

[Wozzy]

Would Brock Purdy take this years team to the playoffs or SB?! Purdy succeeds because of SF loaded team right now….put him here and what happens?! Purdy is like Tua …they are successful because of the OL and weapons around them imho

Bullsht

Purdy's only good because of the weapons, but Trey Lance who they spent a small fortune to acquire looked like dogmeat with the same weapons.

Do you “weapons” guys ever play these things out in your head, or go back and look at results when Deebo or Kittle were hurt?

 

[ahmed]

Bullsht

Purdy's only good because of the weapons, but Trey Lance who they spent a small fortune to acquire looked like dogmeat with the same weapons.

Do you “weapons” guys ever play these things out in your head, or go back and look at results when Deebo or Kittle were hurt?

Yeah like weapons make the QB. Why not just trade Purdy and draft another one late and repeat cycle every couple years. It's mind numbingly stupid.

 

[ahmed]

I didn’t say Brady owes Adam for two rings, I said if not for one of the most clutch kickers in history Brady would probably have two fewer rings. That goes both ways.

I could have used Seymour, if BB doesn’t draft Richard they definitely don’t win in 2001 and probably miss out on another one in 2003.

The notion that one man does it alone in a sport with 53 man rosters is dumb, and that will never change. It’s a fanboy pipe dream.

You said if not for him he would have 2 less rings which is false. Adam was great in the Raiders game. Everything else was nothing special for a Kicker. I am not even trying to insult him as he was a great Kicker and delievered when needed. Just gets way too much credit for the 2 winning SB field goals when his earlier misses were the main reason he even had to make the 2nd one.

I also never said Brady did everything. You are assigning things to me I never said.

 

[1960Pats]

It's dumb because he's ignoring the highest value pick in the draft where you pretty much get your choice of the field and can have any generational type player and the theoretical best pick at any position you want and trying to say, "oh if we ignore how incredible valuable and franchise changing that pick can be, then it's really like we basically are picking after the Super Bowl team the rest of thedraft. No the Super Bowl winner will always be waiting 31 picks behind the last place team. When you get 1 pick they have 0 for 31 picks. When you get 2, they only have 1 for 31 picks.

We used to always joke that we'd trade out of late 1st round because at that point the preemium players are gone and you are effectively getting high 2nd round talent. So now you get the best pick AND still get a comprable pick to what we got all the years we won Super Bowls. Then you get the best 3rd round, and 4th round etc.

You're talking theory, not reality. There are teams that have top picks every year and do nothing and mistakes are made in every round. That's why no one pick is going to guarantee a team anything and hasn't in many cases. Even some of the #1 picks have been failures.

It's the same reason that the draft chart never works out in reality the way it does in theory. How many points was Tom Brady worth at 199 and what value did he actually end up with? The NYFL HOF is chock full of players that went off that theoretical chart. Some of them, like Brady, smashed it to pieces, but there are plenty of others.